Apostacy by 570 A.D / For Casen and us

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic-rcia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In my understanding the Apostacy was a gradual happening, not sudden on a set date. There were many changes in the original Church that eventually resulted in God taking away the authority to act in His name. Christianity( the belief in Jesus Christ obviously did not die) The Catholic Church kept it alive, in spite of the things that caused God to remove His keys to the priesthood from the earth for a time.
It is my understanding that the priesthood can not be passed on without the authority to act in God’s name. I do not think anyone can state a specific date that this happened. It began before Justinian became emperor of Rome. He pretty much sealed it by taking control of the Pope and making changes in the church, that took it far from the original church that Jesus Christ established. I do not say any of this to hurt anyone or make them mad. If I did not believe that this happened I would be Catholic instead of LDS. That is all. For the record my husband is to this date a good Catholic and not joining the CoJCoLDS. I will be sure to let you know if and when he does. Don’t hold your breath… 🙂 BJ
 
BJ Colbert:
In six years of attending the LDS church he has not come across some of the weird things claimed in these posts. Just as in six years of attending Catholic Mass, I have not seen any of the weird things claimed by anti-Catholics about the Catholic Church. He is only reading and investigating, not joining. The posts caused him to have questions. That is all…BJ
Click to expand...
I would like to highlight this statement.

I have never met someone (someone who I did not at least initially meet through the internet) who could explain Latria vs. Dulia, who knew anything about Newman’s essays, or who knew about Pope Honorius or Liberius (of course all of the explanations I mention I pretty much researched for myself, because I was not going to take the word of anti-Catholics).

Anyway, if you think LDS are somehow kept in the dark about our history in some inappropriate way, you might research what future Cardinal Newman said when first approached with the idea that Catholic history should be taught.

The experience in a LDS service or temple is radically different than what anti-Mormons present. The experience in a Catholic Mass or confessional is radically different than what anti-Catholics present. The parallels are profound.

Here are the words of a fellow who was Catholic:

“The underlying motive for this thesis, was my . . . perception that one connection between the Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints lay in the fact that those who sought to deny the label ‘Christian’ to the LDS Church were, more often than not, the very same people who would then turn around and attempt to deny this label to the Catholic Church with the same reasons often being used in both instances to justify the conclusion. And since it was easy enough for me to see through the many half-truths, misunderstandings, and even outright errors alleged against the Catholic Church, I suspected that similar critiques leveled against the LDS Church as to its ‘non-Christian’ status were equally flawed.”

Charity, TOm
 
you might research what future Cardinal Newman said when first approached with the idea that Catholic history should be taught.
Click to expand...
Agreed. There has been resistance towards teaching negative aspects of Catholic history. The ignorance I encountered in my Knights of Columbus thread was astounding. People must be knowlegeable about this in order to be able to present responses to criticism of the Church. And have some direction to move towards in what the church does.
I have never met someone (someone who I did not at least initially meet through the internet) who could explain Latria vs. Dulia,
Click to expand...
This might be appropriate reading material for BJ.

ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ204.HTM
 
RCIA,

“Do you have some things to post about what was happening around that time?”

I would think that the LDS here would have lots of stuff on that span of time. I was also taught that the Apostasy took place after the last apostle died but this is a changing date as it has appeared here at these forums.

I find it interesting that this post has grown as it has with nothing about the Great Apostacy during this time frame.

As of late, and as a Catholic I am finding a lot of arrogance in even the thought of an apostasy of what Christ built for each of us. A place to go to take each one of our own apostasies that effects ourselves and those around us. A place we call the body of Christ, His Church, Himself. The only force that I know that could possibly think that it could do a better job than the Church Christ established is the same force that gives me the why and reason to go to Mass and to Confession.
 
BJ Colbert:
In my understanding the Apostacy was a gradual happening, not sudden on a set date. There were many changes in the original Church that eventually resulted in God taking away the authority to act in His name. Christianity( the belief in Jesus Christ obviously did not die) The Catholic Church kept it alive, in spite of the things that caused God to remove His keys to the priesthood from the earth for a time.
It is my understanding that the priesthood can not be passed on without the authority to act in God’s name. I do not think anyone can state a specific date that this happened. It began before Justinian became emperor of Rome. He pretty much sealed it by taking control of the Pope and making changes in the church, that took it far from the original church that Jesus Christ established. I do not say any of this to hurt anyone or make them mad. If I did not believe that this happened I would be Catholic instead of LDS. That is all. For the record my husband is to this date a good Catholic and not joining the CoJCoLDS. I will be sure to let you know if and when he does. Don’t hold your breath… 🙂 BJ
Click to expand...
Wait a minute B.J. I was just reading other posts made a couple of days ago and didn’t you say that after 6 years now, your husband had decided to become a LDS missionary because of what Catholics said on the forum? I must have misundersttod. Sorry.
 
Wow, this thread has had a lot of posts since I left town. Anyway, I don’t want to shirk the challenge but I think TOm has done a better job with this than I could and is far more knowledgeable than me on the subject. I agree the topic of the Great Apostasy and whether or not it did indeed occur is important for Catholics and Mormons. However, in my readings I’ve come to the conclusion that studying history will only take you so far. At the end of the day I can’t definitively prove that the Great Apostasy did indeed occur and I don’t think Catholics can prove to me that it didn’t. But since I’ve received a personal witness that the Book of Mormon is true and that Joseph Smith was indeed a Prophet of God I must conclude that there was an apostasy and that priesthood authority was interrupted at some point, and there is historical evidence to support this belief. Please don’t take this belief as arrogance. It’s just the personal conclusion I’ve come to after study and prayer and a different understanding of the scriptures.

I believe that sincere, intelligent and fair minded people can come to different conclusions on this topic and I won’t deny that Catholics certainly have a strong position and can make a very compelling case. Anyway, my purpose here isn’t to disprove Catholicism or prove my church is the correct one. Rather my purpose here is only to answer questions about my church, clarify mischaracterizations, and have some friendly debate.
 
BJ Colbert:
ooops it is so difficult to stay on subject. The Apostacy, did not occur for Catholics, but did for LDS. That pretty much sums it up. Just different beliefs, nothing against Catholics except, that if we are right then our Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ, and if you are right then your church is the true Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Actually, if there was NO great apostacy then it gives credibility to the Catholics, and the CoJCoLDS would have nothing to stand on, thus being completely false…however, if the great apostacy DID happen, then it doesn’t necessarily destroy the Catholic Faith (though it does take away credibility), but neither does it PROVE the CoJCoLDS either, it would only give credibility.

Remember, Jesus didn’t come to prove He was God, but He did give reason to believe (credibility) that He was.

However, how it has always ended between me and the missionaries (LDS) that come to my place is this: the great apostacy is not biblical and neither is it historical - and the missionsaries leave time and time again not being able to show anything (even remotely close) saying otherwise. But some good has come of this, I have sponsored two once LDS members into the Catholic Church, and I am in the process of bringing my third right now! Praise Jesus! 🙂

Matt 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
 
40.png
catholic-rcia:
RCIA,

“Do you have some things to post about what was happening around that time?”

I would think that the LDS here would have lots of stuff on that span of time. I was also taught that the Apostasy took place after the last apostle died but this is a changing date as it has appeared here at these forums.

I find it interesting that this post has grown as it has with nothing about the Great Apostacy during this time frame.

As of late, and as a Catholic I am finding a lot of arrogance in even the thought of an apostasy of what Christ built for each of us. A place to go to take each one of our own apostasies that effects ourselves and those around us. A place we call the body of Christ, His Church, Himself. The only force that I know that could possibly think that it could do a better job than the Church Christ established is the same force that gives me the why and reason to go to Mass and to Confession.
Click to expand...
How about the birth of the Islam’s great prophet Mohammed in 570 AD and the sea voyages of the Irish saints? Occured at the same time. We don’t know all the places someone like St. Brandon landed. There is some speculation that he landed in West Virginia, but not proven. We know that there is some proof he was in Newfoundland. he was on a seven year voyage to spread the Gospel after his conversion. 570 ad would have happened in that voyage time.
 
St. Brendan supposedly abandoned his missionary efforts as a result of a message to leave the Western continents alone until “the last days”–
This good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world as a witness to all the nations. Only after that will the end come. Matthew 24:14
Click to expand...
Evidently St. Brendan decided, discovered, realized, was told it was not yet time.

Given the extensiveness of the Catholic missionary effort, this hypothesis is pretty well unfounded.
 
Once the worst of the problems of the Crusdes, Black Death, etc, were resolved, then it was time. There was also the problem of the development of a church cut off from the rest of Christianity, and where it would go in such isolation. So it may have been well to abandon the effort. That is so far back into the mists of time that discussion of it falls deeply into the same kind of gnostic speculative errors as Mormonism itself.
 
40.png
catholic-rcia:
Apostacy by 570 A.D

I think it would be a good idea to post the things that were happening in the Church from say 450 A.D. to say 650 A.D.

Who were the Saints? What did they write about etc… anything else you can find on the Church during these times.
Click to expand...
I found this at: davidmacd.com/catholic/timeline_of_catholic_church.htm. Is this something like what you had in mind?

450s 451 The ecumenical Council of Chalcedon, presided by the Emperor Marcian and the legates of Pope St. Leo I. Over five hundred bishops attend. They approve the Tome of St. Leo as an orthodox statement of faith. It affirms that there is a hypostasis in Christ, a union of the Divine and the Human natures in one person. Bishop Dioscoros of Alexandria is condemned for having protected Eutyches the heretic. The Council also denounces the intervention of the Emperor in religious affairs.

454 At the death of the exiled Monophysite bishop Dioscoros of Alexandria, they elect a successor, Timothy, nicknamed “the Cat” to replace the Catholic bishop who had already been installed. Imperial troops are sent in to restore order and Timothy the Cat is exiled along with other Monophysite bishops.

*460s 461 Beginning of reign of Pope St. Hilarus (-468).

461 Death of St. Patrick, apostle to the Irish.

468 St. Simplicius becomes Pope (-483).

470s 477 Death of Genseric, King of the Vandals and persecutor of Catholics. His successor, Hunseric, seeks to eliminate Catholicism entirely from Northern Africa. He assembles 466 Catholic bishops and gives them four months to apostatize to Arianism, or else the traditional imperial decrees against heresy would be applied to them. Many trades are closed off to the common people unless they can produce a certificate of Arian conformity.

*480s 480 Birth of St. Benedict of Nursia (d. 543), founder of Western monasticism and originator of the Benedictine Rule.

483 St. Felix III is elected Pope (-492).

484 Beginning of Acacian Schism. Pope Felix III excommunicates Patriarch Acacia of Constantinople for signing the Henoticon, a vague document, which contained no heretical statement, but did not condemn Monophytism. It was intended by the Emperor Zeno to be a compromise formula of faith to please both Catholics and Monophysites.

*490s 491 The Armenian Church secedes from the Church of Rome and Constantinople.

492-496 Pope Gelasius I. He was also a staunch defender of the papal office during the Acacian Schism.

494 Some persecuted bishops of North Africa are recalled from exile.

496 Pope Anastasius II begins his reign (-498).

496 Clovis, king of the Franks, converts to Catholicism. When his troops appear to be losing against the Alemanni at Strasbourg, he invokes the God of his Catholic wife Clotilda to give him victory. He is baptized by St. Remi, and brings the Franks to the Catholic fold, the first barbarian people to adopt Catholicism.

498 Election of Pope St. Symmachus (-514).

499 The Synod of Rome issues decree on papal elections. It banned discussions on the election of a future pope during a reigning pope’s lifetime. It was an attempt to conspire to make an election truly democratic, and not make the reigning pope choose his successor.
40.png
catholic-rcia:
Keeping in mind this Parable / is this not about our Church? Ourselves?
Click to expand...
Matt 13:24-30 is one of my favorite parables… I think Christ is talking about how salvation can be lost and not about a general apostacy within the Church.
 
Matt 13:24-30 is one of my favorite parables…

“I think Christ is talking about how salvation can be lost and not about a general apostasy within the Church.”

One way I see it is that we all have good grain in us, - Christ - and because we also have a fallen nature we have the tares. By coming to Christ he takes care of the Tares by His Cross for us. In the end Satan is defeated. Of course he already has been defeated as we know the final score.
 
Seems I am late to the party (again! ).

IMO, the parable of the wheat and the tares is one of the strongest passages in the NT that supports the belief in an unbroken continuity of the Church between the our Lord’s first advent, and His return in glory—i.e. the second advent.

I discussed this parable at length on another message board last month. Rather than repeat my thoughts, I shall instead supply the link:

http://www.kevingraham.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5

Grace and peace,

Aug

P.S. I am David in the linked thread.
 
Concerning the 570 AD date, I think many here will find the following discourse of interest. The lecturer, BYU professor Noel B. Reynolds, adopts the view that the Great Apostasy must have occurred in the first century (a view that I espoused on another MB about 5 years ago as the most consistent one within the LDS paradigm). See:

byubroadcasting.org/findatalk/details.asp?ID=5033

Also, Reynolds is the editor of a new book (Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy**, **June 2005) on the apostasy from the LDS perspective that should prove to be an interesting read. See:

http://www.farmsresearch.com/

Grace and peace,

Aug
 
40.png
AugustineH354:
Seems I am late to the party (again! ).

IMO, the parable of the wheat and the tares is one of the strongest passages in the NT that supports the belief in an unbroken continuity of the Church between the our Lord’s first advent, and His return in glory—i.e. the second advent.

I discussed this parable at length on another message board last month. Rather than repeat my thoughts, I shall instead supply the link:

http://www.kevingraham.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5

Grace and peace,

Aug

P.S. I am David in the linked thread.
Click to expand...
Did you see that I briefly mentioned your Parable continuity argument in post #27 of this thread. I provided what I called a “somewhat muted” response also. I think I will go to Kevin’s board and see if I can respond less muted-ly (in a bit).

Charity, TOm
 
Hi Tom,

Yes, I did see your post.

Kevin’s responses to my posts are interesting, but, unless one is already LDS, they are not persuasive (IMO). I will be looking forward to your “less muted-ly” reflections.

Grace and peace,

David
 
40.png
Jerusha:
Agreed. There has been resistance towards teaching negative aspects of Catholic history. The ignorance I encountered in my Knights of Columbus thread was astounding. People must be knowlegeable about this in order to be able to present responses to criticism of the Church. And have some direction to move towards in what the church does.

This might be appropriate reading material for BJ.

ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ204.HTM
Click to expand...
Thank you Jerusha, this is a very good and informational site. I appreciate your posting it here. I will read more of it, there is so much to learn, and so much of it is good and explains so clearly. This helps do away with misconceptions learned from not so scholarly sources.
🙂 BJ
 
Just a couple thoughts and some questionss on the macro scale in regards to the great apostacy:
  1. Both Catholics and LDS agree that Christ established a visible church under the authority of Peter and the Apostles.
  2. Both Catholics and LDS agree that some form of the Christian church has survived to this day (be it legitimate or apostate).
In the old testament, whenever Israel transgressed God’s law to the degree that required His intervention, He personally notified them in some way of their apostacy and what the consequence would be. In other words, he called them on it, told them so, and then delivered the punishment/probation that would help them rectify the transgression.

Now, given God’s relationship pattern with Israel in the old testament, why would God remove the priesthood from the early Christian church and not so much give a peep that He did so? If what the church became was so bad that the priesthood had to be removed, why didn’t God tell anyone? The church went on after the great apostacy appointing successors to the bishops without any inkling that this power had been removed. Then suddenly God tells Joseph Smith that He removed the priesthood some 1700 years ago? Does that seem odd to anyone? Why keep it a secret while leaving the church thinking it’s authority was intact all that time?
 
We really have to try and remember that was there no apostasy in 570 or any other time. Didn’t exist, didn’t happen. So what is the point of this thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top